- Forums
- EverQuest
- General Discussion
- Warrior vrs Pally
Warrior vrs PallyFollow
49 posts
i said 65+ i cant rember it was along time ago i can rember if he was time flages or anything sorry
Well, flagging isn't that critical an issue for his point either. I can solo mobs in PoI pretty easily, and I have nowhere near 12k hps. While paladins aren't great soloers, there are some pretty easy to figure out values associated with it.
For a 65 paladin, basically, if he can reduce the damage rate of the mob he's fighting to 50 "real" dps or lower (by any method), and sustain that long enough to kill the mob, then he can solo kill that mob. How he does that is irrelevant, but obviously, if he has to chain stun to reduce the mob's dps, he's not going to be able to sustain that long, and his downtime between kills will be longer. He *can* take higher dps mobs, but it becomes even less efficient. I've found that generally if you *have* to chain stun, or cast any heals other then HOTs, you're going to reduce your overall kill rate sufficiently that the extra exp you get killing a tougher mob doesn't make up for it. That's not to say that a paladin is *ever* a good soloer, but there are levels of soloing, and some methods are better then others.
LoH has pretty much zero effect on the overall tankability of a paladin. It's one of those abilities that sounds really great, and can be a day-saver every once in awhile, but is not significant enough to matter in a normal exp grind situation (and is simply overshadowed by the "normal" healing during a boss fight). As stated above, unless you spend AAs, it doesn't heal that much at all. And assuming you'll get 99% effectiveness out of it is silly even with the AAs spent. You wait that long to use it, and odds are you die (or your target dies).
I'd say I've used probably 90% or more of my "effective" LoHs saving casters who's been agroed early in a fight. Another 5% were used saving another MT during a boss fight when a burst of damage and/or lag in heals occured (and that's *really* iffy and you never really know for sure if a heal wouldn't have landed in time anyway). The final 5% maybe is me saving myself while I' tanking. It's just not needed that often. If you're soloing and need to LoH, you're probably going to die anyway. If you're fighting a named/boss, it's unlikely to make much difference (but as I stated may occasially save the day). Like I said. I've used it far more often saving castes who overagroed (sometimes with no choice). Most common classes by far are chanters and shamans. Both often need to cast early on raid pulls and quite often need saving as a result.
But that's my experience with the ability. It's a nice "oh shi[/b]t" ability. The problem is that usually by the time you realize that someone really does need it (especially the MT in a raid fight) it's too late to save that person. It's more effectively used "covering" someone, when you know they may pull agro and you can target them ahead of time to try to save their bacon. With the rate that MTs are taking damage normally, odds are they'll be dead between the time you realize the next heal wont land in time and can target and use the ability.
IMO LoY's utility got nerfed quite a bit some time ago (could years not I think). Used to be it had a pretty decent range. If you were in the same room as someone, you could target them and drop it on them. Now you practicaly have to be in melee range to use it. I've literally been on the backside of a standard giant model mob, and been too far away to hit the MT standing on the front side of the same mob. Not that useful anymore IMO...
For a 65 paladin, basically, if he can reduce the damage rate of the mob he's fighting to 50 "real" dps or lower (by any method), and sustain that long enough to kill the mob, then he can solo kill that mob. How he does that is irrelevant, but obviously, if he has to chain stun to reduce the mob's dps, he's not going to be able to sustain that long, and his downtime between kills will be longer. He *can* take higher dps mobs, but it becomes even less efficient. I've found that generally if you *have* to chain stun, or cast any heals other then HOTs, you're going to reduce your overall kill rate sufficiently that the extra exp you get killing a tougher mob doesn't make up for it. That's not to say that a paladin is *ever* a good soloer, but there are levels of soloing, and some methods are better then others.
LoH has pretty much zero effect on the overall tankability of a paladin. It's one of those abilities that sounds really great, and can be a day-saver every once in awhile, but is not significant enough to matter in a normal exp grind situation (and is simply overshadowed by the "normal" healing during a boss fight). As stated above, unless you spend AAs, it doesn't heal that much at all. And assuming you'll get 99% effectiveness out of it is silly even with the AAs spent. You wait that long to use it, and odds are you die (or your target dies).
I'd say I've used probably 90% or more of my "effective" LoHs saving casters who's been agroed early in a fight. Another 5% were used saving another MT during a boss fight when a burst of damage and/or lag in heals occured (and that's *really* iffy and you never really know for sure if a heal wouldn't have landed in time anyway). The final 5% maybe is me saving myself while I' tanking. It's just not needed that often. If you're soloing and need to LoH, you're probably going to die anyway. If you're fighting a named/boss, it's unlikely to make much difference (but as I stated may occasially save the day). Like I said. I've used it far more often saving castes who overagroed (sometimes with no choice). Most common classes by far are chanters and shamans. Both often need to cast early on raid pulls and quite often need saving as a result.
But that's my experience with the ability. It's a nice "oh shi[/b]t" ability. The problem is that usually by the time you realize that someone really does need it (especially the MT in a raid fight) it's too late to save that person. It's more effectively used "covering" someone, when you know they may pull agro and you can target them ahead of time to try to save their bacon. With the rate that MTs are taking damage normally, odds are they'll be dead between the time you realize the next heal wont land in time and can target and use the ability.
IMO LoY's utility got nerfed quite a bit some time ago (could years not I think). Used to be it had a pretty decent range. If you were in the same room as someone, you could target them and drop it on them. Now you practicaly have to be in melee range to use it. I've literally been on the backside of a standard giant model mob, and been too far away to hit the MT standing on the front side of the same mob. Not that useful anymore IMO...
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
Well, flagging isn't that critical an issue for his point either. I can solo mobs in PoI pretty easily, and I have nowhere near 12k hps. While paladins aren't great soloers, there are some pretty easy to figure out values associated with it.
For a 65 paladin, basically, if he can reduce the damage rate of the mob he's fighting to 50 "real" dps or lower (by any method), and sustain that long enough to kill the mob, then he can solo kill that mob. How he does that is irrelevant, but obviously, if he has to chain stun to reduce the mob's dps, he's not going to be able to sustain that long, and his downtime between kills will be longer. He *can* take higher dps mobs, but it becomes even less efficient. I've found that generally if you *have* to chain stun, or cast any heals other then HOTs, you're going to reduce your overall kill rate sufficiently that the extra exp you get killing a tougher mob doesn't make up for it. That's not to say that a paladin is *ever* a good soloer, but there are levels of soloing, and some methods are better then others.
LoH has pretty much zero effect on the overall tankability of a paladin. It's one of those abilities that sounds really great, and can be a day-saver every once in awhile, but is not significant enough to matter in a normal exp grind situation (and is simply overshadowed by the "normal" healing during a boss fight). As stated above, unless you spend AAs, it doesn't heal that much at all. And assuming you'll get 99% effectiveness out of it is silly even with the AAs spent. You wait that long to use it, and odds are you die (or your target dies).
I'd say I've used probably 90% or more of my "effective" LoHs saving casters who's been agroed early in a fight. Another 5% were used saving another MT during a boss fight when a burst of damage and/or lag in heals occured (and that's *really* iffy and you never really know for sure if a heal wouldn't have landed in time anyway). The final 5% maybe is me saving myself while I' tanking. It's just not needed that often. If you're soloing and need to LoH, you're probably going to die anyway. If you're fighting a named/boss, it's unlikely to make much difference (but as I stated may occasially save the day). Like I said. I've used it far more often saving castes who overagroed (sometimes with no choice). Most common classes by far are chanters and shamans. Both often need to cast early on raid pulls and quite often need saving as a result.
But that's my experience with the ability. It's a nice "oh shi[/b]t" ability. The problem is that usually by the time you realize that someone really does need it (especially the MT in a raid fight) it's too late to save that person. It's more effectively used "covering" someone, when you know they may pull agro and you can target them ahead of time to try to save their bacon. With the rate that MTs are taking damage normally, odds are they'll be dead between the time you realize the next heal wont land in time and can target and use the ability.
IMO LoY's utility got nerfed quite a bit some time ago (could years not I think). Used to be it had a pretty decent range. If you were in the same room as someone, you could target them and drop it on them. Now you practicaly have to be in melee range to use it. I've literally been on the backside of a standard giant model mob, and been too far away to hit the MT standing on the front side of the same mob. Not that useful anymore IMO...
For a 65 paladin, basically, if he can reduce the damage rate of the mob he's fighting to 50 "real" dps or lower (by any method), and sustain that long enough to kill the mob, then he can solo kill that mob. How he does that is irrelevant, but obviously, if he has to chain stun to reduce the mob's dps, he's not going to be able to sustain that long, and his downtime between kills will be longer. He *can* take higher dps mobs, but it becomes even less efficient. I've found that generally if you *have* to chain stun, or cast any heals other then HOTs, you're going to reduce your overall kill rate sufficiently that the extra exp you get killing a tougher mob doesn't make up for it. That's not to say that a paladin is *ever* a good soloer, but there are levels of soloing, and some methods are better then others.
LoH has pretty much zero effect on the overall tankability of a paladin. It's one of those abilities that sounds really great, and can be a day-saver every once in awhile, but is not significant enough to matter in a normal exp grind situation (and is simply overshadowed by the "normal" healing during a boss fight). As stated above, unless you spend AAs, it doesn't heal that much at all. And assuming you'll get 99% effectiveness out of it is silly even with the AAs spent. You wait that long to use it, and odds are you die (or your target dies).
I'd say I've used probably 90% or more of my "effective" LoHs saving casters who's been agroed early in a fight. Another 5% were used saving another MT during a boss fight when a burst of damage and/or lag in heals occured (and that's *really* iffy and you never really know for sure if a heal wouldn't have landed in time anyway). The final 5% maybe is me saving myself while I' tanking. It's just not needed that often. If you're soloing and need to LoH, you're probably going to die anyway. If you're fighting a named/boss, it's unlikely to make much difference (but as I stated may occasially save the day). Like I said. I've used it far more often saving castes who overagroed (sometimes with no choice). Most common classes by far are chanters and shamans. Both often need to cast early on raid pulls and quite often need saving as a result.
But that's my experience with the ability. It's a nice "oh shi[/b]t" ability. The problem is that usually by the time you realize that someone really does need it (especially the MT in a raid fight) it's too late to save that person. It's more effectively used "covering" someone, when you know they may pull agro and you can target them ahead of time to try to save their bacon. With the rate that MTs are taking damage normally, odds are they'll be dead between the time you realize the next heal wont land in time and can target and use the ability.
IMO LoY's utility got nerfed quite a bit some time ago (could years not I think). Used to be it had a pretty decent range. If you were in the same room as someone, you could target them and drop it on them. Now you practicaly have to be in melee range to use it. I've literally been on the backside of a standard giant model mob, and been too far away to hit the MT standing on the front side of the same mob. Not that useful anymore IMO...
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
14 posts
kk short here for level 55 under paladin is better then warrior cause they have spells.......but after level 55 warriors start to pull away as better TANKS then paladins......around level 55 warriors get many tomes AND pull ahead of paladin in the hp/ac field......but it all comes down to who has better stats, armor, weapons, and skill of playing
Quote:
kk short here for level 55 under paladin is better then warrior cause they have spells.......but after level 55 warriors start to pull away as better TANKS then paladins......around level 55 warriors get many tomes AND pull ahead of paladin in the hp/ac field......but it all comes down to who has better stats, armor, weapons, and skill of playing
This is stretching it pretty far with such broad statements. Although the jist of it is on a decent track theres some major things that are neglected here...
First off Warriors always have much more AC, HP, and Damage mitigation. The only reason it doesn't seem like it sometimes is because of twinking. The fact is that it is in the endgame when 1h + Shield Paladins often do have equal/higher AC than 2h or 1h x2 Warriors.
What they still do not have, however, is warriors Natural mitigation (not sure where it stands now I believe when I quit it was at 10% above - an amount Paladins would kill for.)
Paladins can sometimes make up for this with stuns, many of which start to become much more useful after 50, hell after 65 even, when the ability to stun mobs and cut their DPS to 0 before they are slowed and debuffed often results in taking less damage than a warrior.
Lastly the skill of playing thing everyone wants to agree with cuz its sounds good. Oooo Yeah skill...
It takes skill to be a good Paladin, it takes skill to be a good Warrior. But each can do different things that are FAR beyond skill... No amount of skill could ever make a Paladin a better choice as MT on raid events, the only 'skill' a warrior needs is the ability to click Defensive Disc... No lack of skill will make a Warrior lose their MT position to another 'skilled' warrior with 2k less HP even in group situations. It just doesn't happen - it should/could but it doesn't.
The best 'skill' a MT on a raid can have is just leadership and timing. Many people look to this guy/gal as their leader against the top end mobs, and a confidence which radiates to the raid force - even through the game - is a must. The actual gameplay 'skill' falls into the hands of the Healers - and in certain situations offtanks/kiters/mezzers/ect. - who have to multitask and keep track of numerous factors.
sorry dude but that is crap any pally can take aggro from you whenever he wants.... it is just a fact that without the highest end gear while your aggro may be adequate it will never compare to that of a paladin. That is to say with a warrior and pally = in gear the pally will always be able to generate more aggro
Quote:
sorry dude but that is crap any pally can take aggro from you whenever he wants.... it is just a fact that without the highest end gear while your aggro may be adequate it will never compare to that of a paladin. That is to say with a warrior and pally = in gear the pally will always be able to generate more aggro
This is the problem... Ya'll dont seem to be able to distiguish between "taking" agro and "generating" agro. Theres a HUGE difference. It does NOT take an 'uber' war to "take" and retain agro. It does, however, take a pretty decently geared - and high level - warrior to actually "generate" it.
In highest end game it really can be hard to distinguish which class is better at retaining agro, but a Paladin will always come out on top control wise. While a Warrior technically can get a higher number of Hate points in 1 instant discipline, its not even twice that of a Paladin's stun, and the stuns can be used from further away and can STUN the enemy, thats the point.
Past these disciplines, however, a warrior really can only generate agro through weapon procs and DPS. The higher ends of these weapons again can generate more agro than a Paladin's stun, but not by much. As for Paladin weapons, you don't see too many Paladin weapons that purposefully generate agro, which is somewhat of a good thing.
And while a Paladin can continue to generate agro through controlled stuns, a Warrior has to rely on battle techs and taunt. If the taunter is not at the top of the agro list, taunt is an agro-stealing ability, not an agro building one. When the Warrior is at the top of the agro list then it does help build agro, but this can be a problem when a warrior is struggling to stay on top.
Um. The amount of aggro generated by Taunt, when at the top of the aggro list is negligible (about 10 pts, was the last I read).
Raid MTing is always going to be a warrior's job on 95% of the mobs in EQ. Tanking trash mobs is the forte of the Knight, with snap aggro.
From recent experience, in MPG single group trial of weaponry, I was tanking, warrior in group was DPSing, due to less AC / HP. When he whipped out his 1hs weapons I was in danger of losing aggro. So there's a fairly good balance between built up aggro warrior vs SK.
Ash
Raid MTing is always going to be a warrior's job on 95% of the mobs in EQ. Tanking trash mobs is the forte of the Knight, with snap aggro.
From recent experience, in MPG single group trial of weaponry, I was tanking, warrior in group was DPSing, due to less AC / HP. When he whipped out his 1hs weapons I was in danger of losing aggro. So there's a fairly good balance between built up aggro warrior vs SK.
Ash
As I have said before here, the people who really know who is a good or bad tank, are the healers.
Having healed all types of tanks in all sorts of zones up to level 70, my experience is that it very much depends on both the player skill and equipment.
A well played Shadowknight with very good armour will usually be a much better tank than an "average" warrior.
However, if you are fortunate enough to find a skilled and attentive warrior with very good armour, then he/she will without question be the better tank.
The real test is when things go a bit wrong, I guess by now pretty much every one has done a few "Creators", so we have some common ground for comparison.
I have done many creators as main healer, both with my regular friends group and with many pick up groups.
As a cross section of the population, I would have to say that warriors now clearly have the better tanking capability. This is especially noticeable when, as I said, things go wrong, like having to tank two unslowed mobs at a time. (A Druid healer's nightmare
).
A decent warrior can handle this and keep the group alive and functioning.
From what I have seen a paladin has great difficulty surviving and maintaining aggro on both mobs. A shadowknight does a very good job of holding aggro, but needs way better than average gear to survive.
Having said that, in recent months I have healed several shadowknights and paladins who I would much prefer to group with than some of the warriors (who seem to have never bothered training taunt and seem to have never got around to handing in all their tomes
).
It is rather amazing to get to 70 and find that you are once again getting killed from healing aggro when you try to heal a warrior
a problem I thought I had seen the last of 20 levels ago.
Having healed all types of tanks in all sorts of zones up to level 70, my experience is that it very much depends on both the player skill and equipment.
A well played Shadowknight with very good armour will usually be a much better tank than an "average" warrior.
However, if you are fortunate enough to find a skilled and attentive warrior with very good armour, then he/she will without question be the better tank.
The real test is when things go a bit wrong, I guess by now pretty much every one has done a few "Creators", so we have some common ground for comparison.
I have done many creators as main healer, both with my regular friends group and with many pick up groups.
As a cross section of the population, I would have to say that warriors now clearly have the better tanking capability. This is especially noticeable when, as I said, things go wrong, like having to tank two unslowed mobs at a time. (A Druid healer's nightmare
). A decent warrior can handle this and keep the group alive and functioning.
From what I have seen a paladin has great difficulty surviving and maintaining aggro on both mobs. A shadowknight does a very good job of holding aggro, but needs way better than average gear to survive.
Having said that, in recent months I have healed several shadowknights and paladins who I would much prefer to group with than some of the warriors (who seem to have never bothered training taunt and seem to have never got around to handing in all their tomes
). It is rather amazing to get to 70 and find that you are once again getting killed from healing aggro when you try to heal a warrior
a problem I thought I had seen the last of 20 levels ago.I still perfer SK over Paladin. SKs can self heal with life taps. They can't buff, can't keep themselves healed as good as paladin, and can't heal others, but as tanks, they do more damage, no stun-on-inc-group-vs-mob-staring-contest, mana tap.
as for farming/soloing, sk is better at it than paladins too espcially killing lower level stuff like in PoI.
Edited, Tue Jul 5 12:43:34 2005 by Assailant
as for farming/soloing, sk is better at it than paladins too espcially killing lower level stuff like in PoI.
Edited, Tue Jul 5 12:43:34 2005 by Assailant
Quote:
I still perfer SK over Paladin. SKs can self heal with life taps. They can't buff, can't keep themselves healed as good as paladin,
You say you prefer SKs over pallies becasue of their ability to heal themselves, but then say pallies heal better. Hmmmm.....
Read the whole post, not just the part you quoted.
He was stating that SKs CAN heal themseleves, due to the fact that someone above stated they couldn't.
He then goes on to say that they cannot heal as well as paladins, but have better DPS, get a pet..blah blah blah.
Really do try to follow along...
He was stating that SKs CAN heal themseleves, due to the fact that someone above stated they couldn't.
He then goes on to say that they cannot heal as well as paladins, but have better DPS, get a pet..blah blah blah.
Really do try to follow along...
I have been following along. I was just being a bit more a smart ***. Thats all =p
sorry my posts can be unorganized... hiding IE window from boss takes higher priority so I brust out whatever comes to mind haa
Well, to be perfectly honest, in most group situations, a paladins ability to self heal is pretty insignificant. Occasionally, it can make a difference, and I'll be the first to state that I've been able to self heal through *one* fight when a cleric's gone LD or something. But it's not pretty, and it'll kill your mana.
SKs don't self heal as much, but their heals are "free" in the sense that they don't cost additional mana during the fight, and don't require any action by the SK (so he's not having to toggle target to himself to do it, costing himself dps, and potentially messing things up if someone uses /assist off him when he's doing it).
By far the most common and mana efficient heal spell for a paladin to use is his HOTs. The problem being that if he's got a healer who's also using HOTs, his will be overwritten, which just means that the pally wastes mana for nothing. Our fast heals are decent, but are pretty mana inefficient, so we tend to not use them unless they are needed. IMO, the end result from the perspective of a healer is that the SK will often *seem* to require just a touch less healing because most of the time the paladin wont be healing himself at all, and the SKs life taps will always be healing him a bit througout each fight.
It's an interesting and annoying fact of paladin tanking that we can most efficiently add to healing in a group when the sole healer in that group is a druid, however we end up being the least buffed in that situation as well (since PO9/10 doesn't stack with our crusader line, we can actually self buff better then the druid can buff us, which aint saying much).
SKs don't self heal as much, but their heals are "free" in the sense that they don't cost additional mana during the fight, and don't require any action by the SK (so he's not having to toggle target to himself to do it, costing himself dps, and potentially messing things up if someone uses /assist off him when he's doing it).
By far the most common and mana efficient heal spell for a paladin to use is his HOTs. The problem being that if he's got a healer who's also using HOTs, his will be overwritten, which just means that the pally wastes mana for nothing. Our fast heals are decent, but are pretty mana inefficient, so we tend to not use them unless they are needed. IMO, the end result from the perspective of a healer is that the SK will often *seem* to require just a touch less healing because most of the time the paladin wont be healing himself at all, and the SKs life taps will always be healing him a bit througout each fight.
It's an interesting and annoying fact of paladin tanking that we can most efficiently add to healing in a group when the sole healer in that group is a druid, however we end up being the least buffed in that situation as well (since PO9/10 doesn't stack with our crusader line, we can actually self buff better then the druid can buff us, which aint saying much).
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
As said earlier, the determining factors are gear and skill. All else being equal, the "who's the best" tends to depend on the terrain, rather than any hard and fast rule.
An example - in Riftseekers a warriors better mitigation and higher HP help with the unslowed mob arriving at camp. Warrior hits aggro discs, hits mob a bit, during which time the slower is debuffing and slowing (Making sure not to get aggro). I generally snare on inc, and cast an aggro spell, slower will slow on inc. Mob is thus slowed a little earlier when I am tanking than with warrior, which balances out my lesser mitigation.
Sk's have two types of self healing BTW - procs (from buffs, from AA, and from weapons) and from lifetaps (i.e. cast spells). Lifetaps do cost mana of course, but the procs are for free. The slight downside of proc's is that they don't necessarily go off when needed most... I hate seeing a proc go off for 1400pt heal when at 100% health.
SK self healing stops being truelly effective at around MPG / WoS level (From personal experience. It will be earlier / later due to differing gear standards). In Nest missions for instance, SK taps are merely a way to keep HP topped off, unless a nicely timed crit / exceptional heal lands.
An example - in Riftseekers a warriors better mitigation and higher HP help with the unslowed mob arriving at camp. Warrior hits aggro discs, hits mob a bit, during which time the slower is debuffing and slowing (Making sure not to get aggro). I generally snare on inc, and cast an aggro spell, slower will slow on inc. Mob is thus slowed a little earlier when I am tanking than with warrior, which balances out my lesser mitigation.
Sk's have two types of self healing BTW - procs (from buffs, from AA, and from weapons) and from lifetaps (i.e. cast spells). Lifetaps do cost mana of course, but the procs are for free. The slight downside of proc's is that they don't necessarily go off when needed most... I hate seeing a proc go off for 1400pt heal when at 100% health.
SK self healing stops being truelly effective at around MPG / WoS level (From personal experience. It will be earlier / later due to differing gear standards). In Nest missions for instance, SK taps are merely a way to keep HP topped off, unless a nicely timed crit / exceptional heal lands.
Etuy wrote:
Sk's have two types of self healing BTW - procs (from buffs, from AA, and from weapons) and from lifetaps (i.e. cast spells). Lifetaps do cost mana of course, but the procs are for free. The slight downside of proc's is that they don't necessarily go off when needed most... I hate seeing a proc go off for 1400pt heal when at 100% health.
Yeah. I was thinking free in the sense that the procs really are free, and the lifetaps, while costing mana, also aid the SK in combat (they're used for agro generation, and dps). The lifetaps can be seen as analogous to pally stuns, except that instead of preventing damage from the mob for a few seconds (reducing total healing needed over time), it does some damage and heals the SK (also reducing total healing needed over time). The stuns "scale" a bit better in that they're a flat time (so more effective relative to a lifetap against higher dps mobs). However stuns have hard level limits and lifetaps do not.
As a paladin, here's my perspective on tanking. If I'm tanking something that my stuns can affect, I'm golden. I can control the mob perfectly, moderate its damage exactly when and as needed, and pretty much ensure that I'm not going to die (baring overpulls or something). I actually can't remember the last time I died tanking a mob that I could stun. It's literally that useful. I'll stack my tanking against stunnable mobs against even somewhate better geared warriors and SKs every day.
But if I'm tanking something I can't stun (either due to level or just a mob flagged as stun immmune), I feel like half a tank. Sure. I *can* do it, but not as well as either a similarly geared SK or Warrior. The only thing I have going for me is self heals, and those are generally just plain inadequate (generally even moreso against anything I can't stun). I need to be noticably better geared to be a reasonable choice over a warrior or SK in those situations.
So for pallys it's somewhat of an all or nothing situation. We absolutely rock in some situations, and are kinda bottom of the tanking barrel in others.
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
49 posts
ok 1) wars cant heal or life tap
ok 2) wars have alot of hps ( 16k most hps a war has)
ok 3)paly has a good amunt of hps ( 14k )
ok 4)just vote paldyan
ok 2) wars have alot of hps ( 16k most hps a war has)
ok 3)paly has a good amunt of hps ( 14k )
ok 4)just vote paldyan
At the level where you'll find 16k warriors it doesn't really matter who you have tanking....a wizard could tank(it's fun and it's a good reason to use the CT wand again =p).
A better comparrison would be baz/DoN vendor/OOW tier geared players.
Personally like I said I prefer warriors right now(or in some places I love zerkers) their DPS is great and they can hold agro over my nukes.
A better comparrison would be baz/DoN vendor/OOW tier geared players.
Personally like I said I prefer warriors right now(or in some places I love zerkers) their DPS is great and they can hold agro over my nukes.
Totally agree with Gbaji's analysis of the stuns vs. lifetaps balance. Taking three situations...
Low DPS mobs (e.g. soloing in stillmoon temple) SK and Pal are basically equal.
Mid DPS mobs (using WoS mobs as an example) Paladin draws ahead considerably as a stun is worth a lot more than a lifetap
High DPS mobs (Generally unstunnable e.g. Riftseekers) SK draws ahead, as stuns have no effect.
There's varying opinions on how this should be treated. Some same its a fair balance. Some say that Paladins should be given the ability to stun mobs at that level.
Ash
Low DPS mobs (e.g. soloing in stillmoon temple) SK and Pal are basically equal.
Mid DPS mobs (using WoS mobs as an example) Paladin draws ahead considerably as a stun is worth a lot more than a lifetap
High DPS mobs (Generally unstunnable e.g. Riftseekers) SK draws ahead, as stuns have no effect.
There's varying opinions on how this should be treated. Some same its a fair balance. Some say that Paladins should be given the ability to stun mobs at that level.
Ash
8 posts
i play a level 51 Warrior froglok and i play a level 37 pally, and i made them at roughly the same time, as a pally with decent equipement for my level it takes me twice as long to kill anything by my self at 37, now my warrior at the same level killed at least twice as fast as the pally.Now it all comes down to preference really,i prefer having a war and pally both in group just incase some of those odd and dangerous undead appear.
WOW now thats some awsome replys to my thread. Thanks all for the really cool posts to my first thread. I still have a prefrence to Warrior over Pally but who knows...... Thanks again all.
Quote:
i play a level 51 Warrior froglok and i play a level 37 pally, and i made them at roughly the same time, as a pally with decent equipement for my level it takes me twice as long to kill anything by my self at 37, now my warrior at the same level killed at least twice as fast as the pally.Now it all comes down to preference really,i prefer having a war and pally both in group just incase some of those odd and dangerous undead appear.
starting from level 40's, you'll find that warriors can't solo anything that cons blue.
unless under special circumstances, having more than one "tank" in group is a waste of spot.
Edited, Thu Jul 7 14:09:25 2005 by Assailant
Not really a waste of a spot to have two tanks maybe a warrior and pally as tanks for example. If trouble appears, the warrior can keep tanking if handling it okay, the pally can pull off and if a good pally has been observing all aspects of the mobs, where they are and if attacking the casters. Then, can go handle the strays that are causing problems by several different methods or at least freeze them for a minute, go back and aid warrior and finish main mob always watching and turning to check all sides of area and then keep going in and out of main mob to stop strays and then continuing on main or whatever needs to be done until under control again. A Pally can also heal the other tank if necessary (cleric or whatever low on mana, etc)
If no problems occur, you have two main tanks that can do a lot of damage to the mob and can keep rest of group safer than just one tank, especially on higher end mobs.
If no problems occur, you have two main tanks that can do a lot of damage to the mob and can keep rest of group safer than just one tank, especially on higher end mobs.
first of all, "tanks" are always low dps compared to dps classes with same level of equipment. In most cases, you get double the dps from a dmg class than from a tank class.
let me throw out some wild numbers for OoW bazaar/elemental geared numbers: warrior 100 dps, knights 80 dps, dmg classes 200 dps.
a typical group has tank, healer, slower, dps, dps, puller (sometimes puller can be dps too, but in chain pulling situations, dps from puller is very limited). if a dps is replace by a tank class, this group losses 20% of overall dps.
2nd, crowd control is better with mez, root or kite than off tank. If none of the above option is available, it is better to let one tank tanks both slowed mobs in most cases. When I play a healer, I would rather heal one tank than two even during adds.
Having a 2nd tank in group is ok for upto lvl 40's, maybe even 50's, but the higher lvl content it goes, the wider the gap becomes between tank and dps classes. It maybe ok for exp groups to have 2 tanks, just inefficient, but in trials/adventures it may mean the difference between win and loss.
Don't get me wrong, I usually don't look for "perfect" group setup for normal grinding, but deliberately having 2 tanks in one group is inefficient.
let me throw out some wild numbers for OoW bazaar/elemental geared numbers: warrior 100 dps, knights 80 dps, dmg classes 200 dps.
a typical group has tank, healer, slower, dps, dps, puller (sometimes puller can be dps too, but in chain pulling situations, dps from puller is very limited). if a dps is replace by a tank class, this group losses 20% of overall dps.
2nd, crowd control is better with mez, root or kite than off tank. If none of the above option is available, it is better to let one tank tanks both slowed mobs in most cases. When I play a healer, I would rather heal one tank than two even during adds.
Having a 2nd tank in group is ok for upto lvl 40's, maybe even 50's, but the higher lvl content it goes, the wider the gap becomes between tank and dps classes. It maybe ok for exp groups to have 2 tanks, just inefficient, but in trials/adventures it may mean the difference between win and loss.
Don't get me wrong, I usually don't look for "perfect" group setup for normal grinding, but deliberately having 2 tanks in one group is inefficient.
Recent Visitors: 8
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (8)
- Forums
- EverQuest
- General Discussion
- Warrior vrs Pally
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC